Re: [PATCH -mm 3/5] New system call, unshare (powerpc)

Sorry, I messed up. I created this against 2.6.15-rc5 and not rc5-mm1. I will do a new

build, unit test and post updated patches tomorrow.

-Janak

Paul Mackerras wrote:

JANAK DESAI writes:

--- 2.6.15-rc5-mm1/include/asm-powerpc/unistd.h	2005-12-06
21:06:19.000000000 +0000
+++
2.6.15-rc5-mm1+unshare-powerpc/include/asm-powerpc/unistd.h	2005-12-08
19:11:21.000000000 +0000
@@ -296,8 +296,9 @@
#define __NR_inotify_init	275
#define __NR_inotify_add_watch	276
#define __NR_inotify_rm_watch	277
+#define __NR_unshare		278

How does this apply against 2.6.15-rc5-mm1, which adds spu_run and
spu_create as syscalls 278 and 279?

Paul.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH -mm 3/5] New system call, unshare (powerpc)
    • From: JANAK DESAI <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH -mm 3/5] New system call, unshare (powerpc)
    • From: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [netfilter-core] [PATCH] Decrease number of pointer derefs in nf_conntrack_core.c
• Next by Date: Re: Problem with using spinlocks when kernel is compiled without smp-support
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH -mm 3/5] New system call, unshare (powerpc)
• Next by thread: [PATCH -mm 4/5] New system call, unshare (ppc)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]